Patient, caregiver and other knowledge user engagement in consensus-building healthcare initiatives: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Patient engagement and integrated knowledge translation (iKT) processes improve health outcomes and care experiences through meaningful partnerships in consensus-building initiatives and research. Consensus-building is essential for engaging a diverse group of experienced knowledge users in co-developing and supporting a solution where none readily exists or is less optimal. Patients and caregivers provide invaluable insights for building consensus in decision-making around healthcare, policy and research. However, despite emerging evidence, patient engagement remains sparse within consensus-building initiatives. Specifically, our research has identified a lack of opportunity for youth living with chronic health conditions and their caregivers to participate in developing consensus on indicators/benchmarks for transition into adult care. To bridge this gap and inform our consensus-building approach with youth/caregivers, this scoping review will synthesise the extent of the literature on patient and other knowledge user engagement in consensus-building healthcare initiatives. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Following the scoping review methodology from Joanna Briggs Institute, published literature will be searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases from inception to July 2023. Grey literature will be hand-searched. Two independent reviewers will determine the eligibility of articles in a two-stage process, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Included studies must be consensus-building studies within the healthcare context that involve patient engagement strategies. Data from eligible studies will be extracted and charted on a standardised form. Abstracted data will be analysed quantitatively and descriptively, according to specific consensus methodologies, and patient engagement models and/or strategies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review protocol. The review process and findings will be shared with and informed by relevant knowledge users. Dissemination of findings will also include peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The results will offer new insights for supporting patient engagement in consensus-building healthcare initiatives. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/beqjr.

Social and Structural Drivers of Health and Transition to Adult Care.

CONTEXT: Youth with chronic health conditions experience challenges during their transition to adult care. Those with marginalized identities likely experience further disparities in care as they navigate structural barriers throughout transition. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aims to identify the social and structural drivers of health (SSDOH) associated with outcomes for youth transitioning to adult care, particularly those who experience structural marginalization, including Black, Indigenous, and 2-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, and others youth. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from earliest available date to May 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, followed by full-text. Disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. Primary research studying the association between SSDOH and transition outcomes were included. DATA EXTRACTION: SSDOH were subcategorized as social drivers, structural drivers, and demographic characteristics. Transition outcomes were classified into themes. Associations between SSDOH and outcomes were assessed according to their statistical significance and were categorized into significant (P < .05), nonsignificant (P > .05), and unclear significance. RESULTS: 101 studies were included, identifying 12 social drivers (childhood environment, income, education, employment, health literacy, insurance, geographic location, language, immigration, food security, psychosocial stressors, and stigma) and 5 demographic characteristics (race and ethnicity, gender, illness type, illness severity, and comorbidity). No structural drivers were studied. Gender was significantly associated with communication, quality of life, transfer satisfaction, transfer completion, and transfer timing, and race and ethnicity with appointment keeping and transfer completion. LIMITATIONS: Studies were heterogeneous and a meta-analysis was not possible. CONCLUSIONS: Gender and race and ethnicity are associated with inequities in transition outcomes. Understanding these associations is crucial in informing transition interventions and mitigating health inequities.

Quality Indicators for Youth Transitioning to Adult Care: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Transition from pediatric to adult care is associated with adverse health outcomes for many adolescents with chronic illness. We identified quality indicators for transition to adult care that are broadly applicable across chronic illnesses and health systems. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched, covering earliest available date to July 2021. The Gray Matters framework was used to search gray literature. Two independent reviewers screened articles by title and abstract, followed by full-text review. Disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. Studies were included that identified quality indicators developed via consensus-building methods. Indicators were organized into a framework categorized by illness specificity, level of care, Donabedian model, and Institute of Medicine quality domain. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation tool was used for critical appraisal. RESULTS: The search identified 4581 articles, of which 321 underwent full-text review. Eight peer-reviewed studies and 1 clinical guideline were included, identifying 169 quality indicators for transition. Of these, 56% were illness specific, 43% were at the patient level of care, 44% related to transition processes, and 51% were patient centered and 0% equity focused. Common indicator themes included education (12%), continuity of care (8%), satisfaction (8%), and self-management/self-efficacy (7%). The study was limited by quality indicators developed through consensus-building methodology. CONCLUSIONS: Although most quality indicators for transition were patient-centered outcomes, few were informed by youth and parents/caregivers, and none focused on equity. Further work is needed to prioritize quality indicators across chronic illness populations while engaging youth and parents/caregivers in the process.